On Sat 14-05-22 17:05:15, Yu Kuai wrote:
> They already pass 'bfqd' as the first parameter, there is no need to
> pass 'bfqd->queue_weights_tree' as another parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
Looks good. Just one nit below:
> @@ -945,12 +945,13 @@ void bfq_weights_tree_add(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
> * about overhead.
> */
> void __bfq_weights_tree_remove(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
> - struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
> - struct rb_root_cached *root)
> + struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
> {
> + struct rb_root_cached *root;
Add empty line here please.
> if (!bfqq->weight_counter)
> return;
>
> + root = &bfqd->queue_weights_tree;
> bfqq->weight_counter->num_active--;
> if (bfqq->weight_counter->num_active > 0)
> goto reset_entity_pointer;
Otherwise the patch looks good. Feel free to add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
